Shopping ad click-through rate is one of the few metrics in a Google Ads account that can improve while the business behind it gets worse. That is what 2026's benchmark data appears to show, and the popular explanation — AI Overviews are eating Shopping ad placements — turns out to be much harder to prove than the headline numbers suggest.
The short answer
Shopping ad CTR is rising because impressions are falling faster than clicks, not because ads are performing better. European benchmark data shows Shopping impressions down 15–17% year over year while clicks fell only about 6.5%, which mechanically lifts CTR even when nothing improves. AI Overviews are a plausible cause, but Google Ads provides no segmented reporting for AI Overview placements, so no advertiser can actually confirm it from their own account.
Key takeaways
- Smarter Ecommerce's Q1 2026 benchmark put Shopping impressions down 15% to 17% year over year while clicks stayed roughly flat at -6.5% — the arithmetic behind the CTR rise.
- Its live Market Observer now shows Shopping CTR near 2%, against roughly 1.5% a year earlier.
- Optmyzr's analysis of 21,425 Google Ads accounts found impressions down about 11% (45.90B to 40.25B) and overall CTR up 21.3%, from 1.83% to 2.22%. Ecommerce CTR rose 23.87%.
- Google's own documentation states plainly that "Google Ads currently doesn't offer segmented reporting when ads show within Search AI Overviews" — those impressions are bucketed as Top Ads.
- The impression decline is decelerating, not accelerating: roughly -17% year over year in Q1 2026, but around -6% in Q3 2026. That pattern fits a one-time inventory reset better than progressive AI displacement.
Why is Shopping ad CTR rising in 2026?
Because the denominator shrank.
CTR is clicks divided by impressions. If impressions fall 17% and clicks fall only 6.5%, CTR rises by roughly 13% without a single additional customer reaching your site. That is exactly the shape of the data in Smarter Ecommerce's Q1 2026 benchmark report, built on more than €650M in European ad spend.
| Metric (Shopping, Q1 2026) | Value | Direction |
|---|---|---|
| Impressions, year over year | -15% to -17% | Falling |
| Clicks, year over year | ~-6.5% | Roughly flat |
| CTR | 1.6%–1.8% | Stable in-quarter |
| CPC | €0.31 (Dec) → €0.35 (Mar) | Rising, ~11% YoY |
| Conversion rate | 3.0%–3.5% | Stable |
The live Market Observer has since moved further: Shopping CTR now sits near 2% against roughly 1.5% a year ago, with standard Shopping CPC around €0.36.
This is the inverse of what publishers have experienced. In organic search, impressions climbed while clicks flattened — the widening gap people started calling the crocodile effect. Shopping ads show the mirror image: fewer impressions, steadier clicks, a CTR line that rises for reasons no one should celebrate.
Are AI Overviews actually taking Shopping ad impressions?
This is where the popular explanation runs into a wall, and it is the part most coverage skips.
Google's own Ads documentation confirms that "Text and Shopping ads from existing Search, Shopping and Performance Max campaigns are eligible to show within the AI Overviews." So the placement is real. But the same page states: "Google Ads currently doesn't offer segmented reporting when ads show within Search AI Overviews." Ads that appear inside an AI Overview are reported as Top Ads.
The consequences are worth stating slowly:
- You cannot see how many of your impressions came from an AI Overview.
- You cannot see how many of your clicks came from one.
- You cannot compare AI Overview CTR against classic SERP CTR, because Google has merged them into the same bucket.
Every claim that "AI Overviews caused this" is therefore an inference drawn from the shape of an aggregate, not a measurement. That does not make it wrong. It does mean nobody — including your agency — can currently prove it inside a Google Ads account, and you should be sceptical of anyone who says otherwise.
Does the geography of the data support the explanation?
Only partly, and this is the most overlooked problem with the thesis.
Ads inside AI Overviews are, per Google's documentation, "currently available in English on mobile and desktop devices" in thirteen countries: Australia, Canada, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Malaysia, New Zealand, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore and the US.
No EU country is on that list. Yet the sharpest Shopping impression declines in this data come from a European dataset denominated in euros.
So in the markets generating the Smarter Ecommerce numbers, Shopping ads are largely not being replaced by ads inside AI Overviews — that placement is not broadly live there in local languages. What is live is AI Overviews themselves. Google says they now reach "more than 200 countries and territories and more than 40 languages".
That distinction matters because it changes the mechanism:
| Proposed mechanism | Does it fit European Shopping data? |
|---|---|
| Ad inventory moved into AI Overviews | No — the ad placement is English-only in 13 non-EU markets |
| AI Overview pushes ads down and compresses the SERP | Plausible — AI Overviews run in 200+ countries, 40+ languages |
| Fewer commercial sessions reach a classic SERP at all | Plausible, and untestable from ad reporting |
| Auction and inventory changes unrelated to AI | Plausible, and largely unexamined |
An honest reading is that AI Overviews are one candidate among several, and the data as published cannot separate them.
Is the decline accelerating or slowing down?
Slowing — which is genuinely awkward for the AI Overviews narrative.
If AI Overviews were progressively consuming Shopping inventory as they expanded through 2026, the year-over-year impression decline should deepen quarter after quarter. It has not:
| Period | Shopping impressions, year over year |
|---|---|
| Q1 2026 | -15% to -17% |
| Q3 2026 | ~-6% |
A decline that shrinks from -17% to -6% while AI Overviews continue expanding looks less like ongoing displacement and more like a step change that has now been lapped in the year-over-year comparison. Meanwhile Q3 2026 conversions grew roughly 13% against costs up 4.5% — the efficiency picture improved while the impression picture recovered.
If AI Overviews are eating Shopping, they are apparently eating less each quarter.
What does query-intent data add?
The strongest evidence for the AI Overviews thesis is not in ad data at all. It is in how AI Overviews changed which queries they appear on.
Semrush's study of more than 10 million keywords tracked from January to November 2025 found a clear migration down the funnel:
| Query intent triggering an AI Overview | Start of period | End of period |
|---|---|---|
| Informational | 91.3% | 57.1% |
| Commercial | 8.15% | 18.57% |
| Transactional | 1.98% | 13.94% |
| Navigational | 0.84% | 10.33% |
Commercial intent more than doubled. Transactional intent grew roughly sevenfold. Those are precisely the queries Shopping ads compete on.
Note the timing, though: this shift ran through 2025, ahead of the sharpest impression declines. It establishes that AI Overviews moved into commercial territory. It does not establish that they took ad impressions with them.
Is this a Shopping problem or a Google Ads problem?
A Google Ads problem, mostly — which is the last thing the "AI Overviews are eating Shopping" framing predicts.
Optmyzr's Q1 2026 benchmark, drawn from 21,425 accounts across five consecutive quarters, found impressions down about 11% across all campaign types, from 45.90 billion to 40.25 billion. Overall CTR rose from 1.83% to 2.22%, a 21.3% gain. Search Engine Journal's coverage of the same report adds that Performance Max CTR moved from 1.29% to 1.68%, ecommerce CTR rose 23.87%, and lead generation — which runs no Shopping ads at all — saw nearly 20% CTR growth.
Lead generation rising almost as much as ecommerce is the detail that should reset the conversation. Whatever is compressing the auction pool is not confined to product listings.
And the efficiency metrics barely moved: conversion rate slipped from 6.26% to 6.20%, ROAS held between 428.5% and 430.9%, while CPA rose 4.41%. Higher engagement rates, flat business outcomes.
What should ecommerce advertisers actually measure?
Stop treating CTR as a performance metric. In 2026 it is primarily an inventory metric.
- Watch absolute clicks and absolute conversions. They are the only numbers a shrinking denominator cannot flatter.
- Track impressions as a leading indicator of reach, not as noise to be optimised away. A 17% impression decline is a demand-visibility problem even when CTR looks great.
- Pair CPC with conversion rate. European Shopping CPC rose roughly 11% year over year while conversion rate held at 3.0%–3.5% — you are paying more per click for the same outcome.
- Do not let a rising CTR justify a budget cut. Fewer impressions at a higher CTR usually means the auction shrank, not that targeting got sharper.
- Measure AI-surface visibility separately. Since Google will not segment it for you, your organic and brand-mention presence inside AI answers is the only view you can actually build. That is a different discipline from paid reporting — see our guide to AI search visibility and the KPIs worth tracking.
The broader point: as AI Overviews expand and auto-expand themselves, the classic SERP is becoming a smaller share of what a commercial searcher sees. Paid reporting is not built to show you that. Your own measurement has to.
Frequently asked questions
Why is my Shopping ad CTR up if my sales are flat?
Because CTR rose through a falling denominator. Benchmark data shows Shopping impressions down 15–17% year over year while clicks fell only about 6.5%. Fewer impressions with roughly the same clicks produces a higher CTR without any improvement in traffic or revenue.
Can I see how many impressions came from AI Overviews?
No. Google's advertising documentation states that Google Ads does not currently offer segmented reporting when ads show within Search AI Overviews. Those impressions and clicks are reported as Top Ads, blended with classic SERP placements.
Are Shopping ads shown inside AI Overviews everywhere?
No. Google lists ads in AI Overviews as available in English only, on mobile and desktop, in Australia, Canada, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Malaysia, New Zealand, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines, Singapore and the US. AI Overviews themselves are far broader — more than 200 countries and territories and over 40 languages.
Is the Shopping impression decline getting worse?
It appears to be easing. European Shopping impressions were down 15–17% year over year in Q1 2026 but around 6% in Q3 2026, while conversions grew roughly 13% against a 4.5% cost increase. A shrinking decline is difficult to reconcile with steadily increasing AI displacement.
Is this only affecting ecommerce advertisers?
No. Optmyzr's analysis of 21,425 accounts found impressions down about 11% across all campaign types, and lead generation campaigns — which run no Shopping ads — saw nearly 20% CTR growth. The compression is account-wide, not Shopping-specific.
Should I cut my Shopping budget if CTR is improving?
Not on CTR alone. Check absolute clicks, conversions, CPC and ROAS first. Optmyzr's data showed conversion rate slipping from 6.26% to 6.20% and CPA rising 4.41% while CTR climbed 21.3% — engagement rates improved while efficiency did not.
Where to go from here
If paid reporting can no longer show you what AI surfaces are doing to your visibility, build the view yourself.
- Confirm AI crawlers can actually reach your product and category pages with the free crawler checker.
- Audit what search engines read about your pages with the meta tags checker.
- See how Google's AI search surfaces work, and which AI search KPIs are worth reporting on.
- Want the full picture for your own domain? Request a report.
Related reading: AI Search Visibility: Why Clicks Are Falling and Brand Demand Isn't.